Hours after the new criminal case against Pedro San Ginés publicly broke, the UCO called eight witnesses to testify, who supposedly participated in the meeting where it was approved to hire Ignacio Calatayud for the Inalsa bankruptcy procedure. And after their statement, and based on the report issued by the agents, the judge added a new crime to the investigation: that of forgery in a public document.
In his order, the magistrate pointed out that the statements of these witnesses cast “doubts about the veracity” of the meeting minutes, since none remembered having attended and two expressly denied having participated.
Afterwards, the UCO investigation has yielded another determining fact. And it is that on the day of the alleged meeting, January 18, 2010, Ignacio Calatayud was actually in Madrid, according to the geolocation obtained from the inspection of his mobile phone. In other words, he could not have been present at that meeting, despite the fact that his name also appears in the minutes.
“The specific location places the terminal on Paseo del Duque Fernán Núñez street in the town of Madrid, both on January 18, 2010 and on the days before and after that date, a location that is fully compatible with the address where the investigated person resides”, the UCO states in one of its reports.
The minutes were signed by Pedro San Ginés himself and by the then Inalsa secretary, Pedro Antonio Márquez Rodríguez. The latter also became charged when the alleged falsification began to be investigated, but he died shortly afterwards.
“I have never been in the Cabildo auditorium”
Along with San Ginés, Calatayud and the secretary, the minutes indicated that eight public officials were present at the meeting. In fact, the former president has repeatedly referred to that document to defend that it was a collegial decision.
One of those who flatly denied having participated in that meeting was the former councilor of Tías and former insular secretary of the PP, José Pablo Lemes. In his case, he stated that he knows the Inalsa bankruptcy procedure only “by hearsay”, and that he has never “participated” in that organization, “nor has he ever been in the Cabildo auditorium”, where the meeting was supposedly held.
The other was the former PIL councilor Fabián Martín, who stated that “he is sure that he has not attended any meeting of a similar nature in the Cabildo auditorium”. He even pointed out that “he does not remember having taken office as a director of Inalsa”; nor “having participated in any act in which all the people mentioned” in the minutes of that meeting were present.
Of the other six, mayors and councilors, none remembered having attended. Most didn't even know how to talk about Inalsa's bankruptcy, and even stated that they don't know who the public company's lawyer was, despite the fact that Pedro San Ginés maintains that they authorized his hiring.
That was the case, for example, of the mayor of Tinajo and San Ginés' party colleague, Jesús Machín, who stated that he was unaware of that appointment, despite the fact that his name also appears in the minutes. Furthermore, given that José Pablo Lemes testified before him and flatly denied having attended the meeting, he was also asked about it. In this regard, Jesús Machín stated that he does not remember having coincided with Lemes “in any act in which both intervened as councilors of Inalsa”.
“Members freely chosen from among qualified people”
The former Cabildo councilors Juan Carlos Becerra (PNL), Ramón Bermúdez (PIL) and Plácida Guerra (PIL) - the latter councilor of Inalsa for years - answered “I don't remember” to all the agents' questions.
For his part, the then mayor of Haría, José Torres Stinga, also did not remember having attended that meeting. Regarding Inalsa's bankruptcy, he only knew how to say that “he, among others, suffered foreclosures due to that procedure.”
Finally, the current mayor of Arrecife and then PP councilor in the Cabildo, Ástrid Pérez, did answer that the first lawyer in the bankruptcy process was Cobo Plana, and that after Pedro San Ginés assumed the Presidency, Ignacio Calatayud became the lawyer, but little else. She does not “remember” having attended that meeting in which he was appointed and, like Fabián Martín, she does not remember having taken office as a councilor of Inalsa either.
The minutes indicate that the session corresponds to the General Assembly of the Lanzarote Water Consortium, “constituted as the General Board of Inalsa”. Regarding the attendees, it indicates as “members” of the body the then president of the Cabildo, Pedro San Ginés, and as mayors José Torres Stinga and Jesús Machín. Of the rest, it indicates that they were “members freely chosen from among qualified people”, and that they joined the body in that same session that none remember.
A designation “deliberately generic and ambiguous”
In any case, even before suspecting the veracity of that act, both the UCO and the investigating judge considered that what was approved in that alleged meeting did not legally cover the hiring of Calatayud.
“The designation of the lawyer, in addition to openly violating the regulations regarding administrative contracting, was deliberately generic and ambiguous, since, among other things, no reference was even made to the issue of his fees”, warned the judge investigating this case. It was later when a budget was authorized, subsequently modified by another even more “harmful” to Inalsa, and neither of the two was presented to the councilors or to any collegiate body of the Consortium or Inalsa.
In this regard, the magistrate also pointed out that since Inalsa was intervened at that time, with bankruptcy administrators, “it is doubtful that the Board of Directors could adopt any decision on the designation of a lawyer, and furthermore, it did so under conditions different from those established with respect to the lawyer previously hired.”
In one of its first reports, the UCO already warned of a possible crime of malfeasance in the hiring of Calatayud, pointing out that “it was carried out outside the legally established procedure for this type of contract, this being an arbitrary decision by Pedro San Ginés, taking advantage of his position as CEO” of Inalsa.
